Google is under siege in Washington like never before — and it says an “anti-Google industrial complex” is to blame.

In an interview with POLITICO, a Google spokesman argued that a cabal of antitrust lawyers, lobbyists and public relations firms is conspiring against the Internet search giant. The mastermind? Google says it’s Microsoft.

Text Size

VIDEO: Wasserman on D.C.'s tech wars

POLITICO 44

In the 1990s, Microsoft was the tech industry wunderkind that got too big for its britches — and Google CEO Eric Schmidt, then an executive at Sun Microsystems and later Novell, helped knock the software titan down a peg by providing evidence in the government’s antitrust case against it.

The constraints imposed on Microsoft in that case helped clear the way for Google’s rise to rule the Web. Now — as Google spreads its tentacles into everything from mobile phones to digital online libraries to green energy — some of Microsoft’s allies are saying it’s time for the search giant to get its comeuppance.

“There is so much conduct that should be investigated,” said Pamela Jones Harbour, a former Federal Trade Commission member, who opposed Google’s merger with online advertising firm DoubleClick in 2007.

Harbour, now an attorney specializing in competition issues, consults for Microsoft on competition and policy issues, and she says Google now has a monopoly.

But there are also increasing calls from some Silicon Valley competitors and Washington-based public interest groups for the Justice Department to launch a sweeping antitrust probe of Google. The European Union and the state of Texas have reviews under way.

Google says its rivals are fueling the attacks. Specifically, the company points to Microsoft, which has a stable of consultants and lawyers in Washington banging the antitrust drums.

“We try to create lots of new technologies for consumers, and the companies and industries that we disrupt sometimes try to seek recourse in Washington,” said Adam Kovacevich, a Google spokesman, who recently was detailed to deal solely with antitrust issues. “In particular, Microsoft and our large competitors have invested a lot in D.C. to stoke scrutiny of us. But our goal is to make sure that we can continue creating cool new things for consumers.”

Microsoft declined to trade barbs publicly but argues that Google is lashing out amid a growing number of complaints to regulators and lawmakers about the company’s business practices. The company points out competitors usually are the source of antitrust complaints.

One of Microsoft’s antitrust attorneys, Charles “Rick” Rule, of the international law firm Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, wrote in The Wall Street Journal in a September op-ed piece that Google is a monopolist and should face an investigation.

Readers' Comments (58)

I'd feel bad for Google, but they've crawled into bed (colluded) with the Obama Administration one too many times. By coordinating with Obama--and the left--to control information flow, Google surrendered the mantle of impartiality.

I'd feel bad for Google, but they've crawled into bed (colluded) with the Obama Administration one too many times. By coordinating with Obama--and the left--to control information flow, Google surrendered the mantle of impartiality.

Here's an interesting read. They DESERVE whatever they get!

___________________

What a dumb comment above!

This has zero to do with politics and everything to do with macro-economics.

---The brazenness of the Obama administration never ceases to amaze. Try typing "Obamacare" into Google, and you'll find that the first entry is now the Obama administration's www.healthcare.gov. If you don't particularly like that result, you'll probably hate the fact that you're paying for it.

You'll get the same paid-for result if you type in "Obamacare facts," "Obamacare summary," "Obamacare info," "Obamacare overview," "Obamacare questions," "Obamacare explanation," "Obamacare basics," "Obamacare pros and cons," "Obamacare and elderly," and even "Obamacare and abortion." For each of these search terms, and many others, the Obama administration's site comes up first, as a paid entry. But it doesn't come up if you type in "ObamaCare repeal."

Politico's Ben Smith, in a post entitled "HHS Buys 'ObamaCare,'" quotes an official from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), who confirms that this clear attempt to influence what Americans read about Obamacare does, indeed, represent your tax dollars at work: "'We are using a bunch of search term[s] to help point people to HealthCare.gov. [It's] [p]art of our online efforts to help get accurate information to people about the new law (i.e. [we] also use Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webcasts),' an HHS official confirmed by e-mail."---

**In case you didn't already know it, our ability to access information as a free and open society is severely endangered by this sort of collusion between the Obama Administration and Google.

---The brazenness of the Obama administration never ceases to amaze. Try typing "Obamacare" into Google, and you'll find that the first entry is now the Obama administration's www.healthcare.gov. If you don't particularly like that result, you'll probably hate the fact that you're paying for it.

You'll get the same paid-for result if you type in "Obamacare facts," "Obamacare summary," "Obamacare info," "Obamacare overview," "Obamacare questions," "Obamacare explanation," "Obamacare basics," "Obamacare pros and cons," "Obamacare and elderly," and even "Obamacare and abortion." For each of these search terms, and many others, the Obama administration's site comes up first, as a paid entry. But it doesn't come up if you type in "ObamaCare repeal."

Politico's Ben Smith, in a post entitled "HHS Buys 'ObamaCare,'" quotes an official from Secretary Kathleen Sebelius's Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), who confirms that this clear attempt to influence what Americans read about Obamacare does, indeed, represent your tax dollars at work: "'We are using a bunch of search term[s] to help point people to HealthCare.gov. [It's] [p]art of our online efforts to help get accurate information to people about the new law (i.e. [we] also use Facebook, Twitter, blogs and webcasts),' an HHS official confirmed by e-mail."---

**In case you didn't already know it, our ability to access information as a free and open society is severely endangered by this sort of collusion between the Obama Administration and Google.

(click link above to finish article)

______________________

Yes they did...AND SO WHAT?

It's called web based politics.

Obama invented the rules of web based politics in 2008. Obama is perfecting those rules in 2011 and 2012!

Barack Obama's billionaire backers New president has a wealth of tycoons advising — and funding — him

Despite funding the majority of his presidential run with paltry $5 donations from everyday Americans, President-elect Barack Obama has had a slew of billionaire backers with him on his journey to the White House — plutocrats who provide economic and political advice and help to raise money. Lots of money.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt, right, endorsed Barack Obama last fall and is currently a technology adviser in his transition team. Schmidt and Google co-founder Larry Page have each contributed $25,000 to the inauguration events.

Google for Kerry? According to USA Today, 98% of search engine's employees gave money to Democrats in '04.February 14, 2005: 8:36 AM EST

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Google Inc. employees took out their wallets and showed overwhelming support for the Democratic Party last year, according to a report Monday in USA Today.

A USA Today campaign finance analysis found that, of the company's overall political contributions, 98 percent went to Democrats, the biggest share among top tech donors.

The online search company's employees gave $207,650 to federal candidates during last year's election campaign, which includes the White House race between Democrat John Kerry and the winning incumbent Republican, President Bush. The contributions were up from just $250 in 2000 when Google was a start-up, according to the paper.

The paper said that 53 percent of the broader tech industry's $25.9 million went to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign finance.

Political contributions by the industry may be in response to recent debates on Capitol Hill over Internet taxes, offshoring of jobs and other issues.

Google giving is still small compared with other tech donors, USA Today said. Microsoft employees gave $3.1 million last year -- and of that amount, 60 percent went to Democrats, according to the report.

There are two articles (1, 2) up at The Jawa Report stating that people with fake names and addresses can make campaign contributions to Barack Obama with legitimate credit cards. One writer made a $5 donation to Barack Obama (with screenshots to include his online banking site to verify the donation) under the name of James Bond in London, DC (as in Washington).

Donations from foreigners to presidential campaigns are most certainly illegal. This is not a foreigner making the donation but it certainly allows for the possibility of it. One person from Canada fraudulently claiming to be a U.S. citizen making a $5 donation would be illegal thus bringing in to question the fundraising policies of the Obama camp.

This isn’t just some ultra right wing bomb throwing either. An official complaint has been filed with the FEC and Google search results of foreign donations to Obama bring up nearly 300,000 hits. This is another reason Why Barack Obama Scares Me.

This insane level of corruption needs to be exposed to the light of day. Otherwise our country is done. The amount of collusion between Obama & Google, Obama & GE, Obama & GM/Chrysler--and the corruption that it represents--should scare the heck out of anyone smart enough to understand the 1st Amendment and the ongoing threat of Corporate fascism.

There are two articles (1, 2) up at The Jawa Report stating that people with fake names and addresses can make campaign contributions to Barack Obama with legitimate credit cards. One writer made a $5 donation to Barack Obama (with screenshots to include his online banking site to verify the donation) under the name of James Bond in London, DC (as in Washington).

Donations from foreigners to presidential campaigns are most certainly illegal. This is not a foreigner making the donation but it certainly allows for the possibility of it. One person from Canada fraudulently claiming to be a U.S. citizen making a $5 donation would be illegal thus bringing in to question the fundraising policies of the Obama camp.

This isn’t just some ultra right wing bomb throwing either. An official complaint has been filed with the FEC and Google search results of foreign donations to Obama bring up nearly 300,000 hits. This is another reason Why Barack Obama Scares Me